Columbia Pictures | Release Date: November 14, 2008
6.3
USER SCORE
Generally favorable reviews based on 603 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
298
Mixed:
221
Negative:
84
Watch Now
Stream On
Stream On
Review this movie
VOTE NOW
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Check box if your review contains spoilers 0 characters (5000 max)
2
CoryNov 16, 2008
Stereotypical action movie-200 hundred guys with machine guns shooting at the main character and nobody can hit him! Even worse, there are way too many characters without introductions that confuse you all movie.
1 of 1 users found this helpful
3
AlexC.Nov 17, 2008
Worst Bond film ever based on many facts: no character development, no depth to the plot, very plain action sequences (with many borrowed from previous films) and way too many loose ends. It seems like all the good scenes were edited out to Worst Bond film ever based on many facts: no character development, no depth to the plot, very plain action sequences (with many borrowed from previous films) and way too many loose ends. It seems like all the good scenes were edited out to leave this skeleton with no meat for a story. Wait for video. Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful
2
JamesNov 28, 2008
Extremely poor plot and very far fetched, even for a bond flick. The director expects us to believe bond miraculously survives multiple certain death situations with giving even a hint as to how. I had hopes that the bond franchise had Extremely poor plot and very far fetched, even for a bond flick. The director expects us to believe bond miraculously survives multiple certain death situations with giving even a hint as to how. I had hopes that the bond franchise had wisened up given a more human nature of casino royale, but they have gone terribly of the rails this time around. Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful
6
CiaranGJun 29, 2009
With absolutely no explanation of what is going on from scene to scene, what could potentially be a very interesting storyline becomes a mess of over-dramatic action scenes. James Bond just happens to find himself in exotic places on boats, With absolutely no explanation of what is going on from scene to scene, what could potentially be a very interesting storyline becomes a mess of over-dramatic action scenes. James Bond just happens to find himself in exotic places on boats, planes and fast cars but with no explanation... Also, for the first time, I get the feeling that this James Bond is as bad as the other villains! James Bond is supposed to be the hero, not the revenge-seeking murderous d*ck. Action scenes are fun to watch and they happen in a good variety of locations around the world - this is all that saves this film. Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful
2
JakeH.Nov 15, 2008
Piss poor.
1 of 1 users found this helpful
0
JamesBondDec 10, 2008
Village Voice has it right - this was edited in a blender set on indecipherable. Utter garbage. Give me Brosnan or any other Bond for that matter. The director should never be allowed to work again.
1 of 1 users found this helpful
5
jwt7000Nov 20, 2012
This movie is a toss-up since License to Kill. A corny and weak plot so unimaginable winds up being concentrated on something else. Also the movie is short despite five good action scenes and there's nothing else special in this one.
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
7
Smartine7Oct 24, 2011
The plot is just slightly too complex to follow, the Bond-girls aren't quite as stunning, and the writing is not quite as polished as its predecessor. "Quantum"'s primary problem is that it had to follow "Casino Royale". A moderately-funThe plot is just slightly too complex to follow, the Bond-girls aren't quite as stunning, and the writing is not quite as polished as its predecessor. "Quantum"'s primary problem is that it had to follow "Casino Royale". A moderately-fun action movie, an adequate addition to the Bond franchise, but a below-average sequel. Regardless, it's still worth a look. Maybe even two or three. Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
7
moviegrabbagJun 13, 2011
Not up there with Casino Royale but a great follow up to it. The acting was still great but the movie rushed through its self a little bit. Daniel Craig still does a good job and makes me forget about that Pierce guy. Overall a very good movie.
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
4
cryhardhumorJul 26, 2015
What is so sad about Quantum of Solace is the tremendous step down it was from Casino Royale. The only thing that makes this a Bond movie is Bond himself. All the style, action, and fun is sucked out and replaced by painful mediocrity.
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
4
MrMovieBuffOct 30, 2015
Yes, it's true what they say. 'Quantum of Solace' is a silly, choppy action movie that felt less like a Bond movie and more like a Bourne movie.

Daniel Craig still maintains the role magnificently well, doing what he can in a silly action
Yes, it's true what they say. 'Quantum of Solace' is a silly, choppy action movie that felt less like a Bond movie and more like a Bourne movie.

Daniel Craig still maintains the role magnificently well, doing what he can in a silly action film. Olga Kurylenko makes a good Bond girl and Mathieu Amalric is an okay Bond villain. I don't remember him as much as previous villains, especially Mads Mikkelsen ('Casino Royale'), and then Javier Bardem ('Skyfall') four years later.

I am not sure whether 'Quantum of Solace' would have been a much better movie if it wasn't a follow up to the great 'Casino Royale' (2006). It felt more like one of those dumb, gimmicky Pierce Brosnan movies after 'Goldeneye' (1995), this movie reminded me of 'Die Another Day' (2002), I was afraid that this current series of Bond movies would fall into that routine of dumb action and gimmicky moments. After starting off so well in 'Casino Royale' (2006), I feared this movie would end Daniel Craig, luckily he survived this one.

I just hope we never see another dumb action Bond flick ever again.
Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
10
steveos69Nov 10, 2011
I am a huge Bond fan. I have read the Flemming novels and I have seen all movies. Quantum of Solace is my favourite Bond movie by a mile.
It has everything that you could want from a bond film. Awesome action, excellent acting, hot Bond
I am a huge Bond fan. I have read the Flemming novels and I have seen all movies. Quantum of Solace is my favourite Bond movie by a mile.
It has everything that you could want from a bond film. Awesome action, excellent acting, hot Bond girls, a realistic plot and a realistic villain with a genius plan. The car chase and fight scene are better shot and easier to follow than anything in the Bourne films. They're hard hitting and thrilling to watch.
It pays homage to most of the great early movies like Goldfinger and The Spy Who Loved Me.
Sean Connery played Bond just like the character in the Flemming novels but Daniel Craig is by far the best actor to ever portray Bond. He looks classy and he kicks ass when he needs to. Highly recommended.
Expand
4 of 6 users found this helpful42
All this user's reviews
5
CutSceneApr 4, 2009
The most action-oriented Bond movie that I can remember seeing. I don't have a problem with that, but I do have a problem with the way the scenes were done. I literally can't watch the action scenes in the movie. I get so The most action-oriented Bond movie that I can remember seeing. I don't have a problem with that, but I do have a problem with the way the scenes were done. I literally can't watch the action scenes in the movie. I get so frustrated by following whats going on through the cut-scene-orama that it makes me angry. Did anyone who made this movie actually watch it when they were done? That was a rhetorical question because the answer is obvious. No. My advice - dont drink 26 cups of coffee before you edit the next Bond movie. Thanks. Expand
2 of 3 users found this helpful
0
RichardSDec 10, 2008
The worst Bond film of all time. I thought nothing could be worse than Die Another Day. This manages it with some aplomb. The direction is horrible - all split second jump cuts designed to create excitement and stimulate action. It does The worst Bond film of all time. I thought nothing could be worse than Die Another Day. This manages it with some aplomb. The direction is horrible - all split second jump cuts designed to create excitement and stimulate action. It does nothing of the sort, only creating a sense of nausea. The story is boring and flat. Give me back the megalomaniac who wants world control and save me from these weary eco-stories. This has NOTHING in common with any Bond film. No sexiness, no gadgets, no exciting villain, no villain's lair, no henchman, no decent theme, no John Barry music, no intro, no nothing. The worst Bond film or all time, maybe one of the worst films of the year. Expand
3 of 5 users found this helpful
0
JaredJMar 25, 2009
Okay, after the horrid "Casino Royale," I thought that this was going to be a lot cleaner. It wasn't. The clasic "Gun barrel" opening was tossed away to the end of the film and done with horrorfying results. Bond is no longer an Agent Okay, after the horrid "Casino Royale," I thought that this was going to be a lot cleaner. It wasn't. The clasic "Gun barrel" opening was tossed away to the end of the film and done with horrorfying results. Bond is no longer an Agent he is a midless killing machine. Oh and if this is still part of 007's first mission EVER WHY THE *@!$ IS IT IN MODERN TIMES?! After "Die Another Day" we no longer get to see what Bond's next adventure is the re did the whole thing with crappy decisions! No story, tons of action that is poorly developed and RIPS off of Classic bond films! "Goldfinger" is in here but rip offed of it as well as "GoldenEye," "Thunderball," and "Live and Let Die" It has the Bond movie title and logo but it is NOT a Bond film, complete garbage. Expand
3 of 6 users found this helpful
1
SteveCApr 16, 2009
What a dismal Bond movie. It had none of the character development or plot of the last one. Purely two-dimensional. On top of that, the actions scenes are shot in the increasingly popular super-close style that makes it so you can't What a dismal Bond movie. It had none of the character development or plot of the last one. Purely two-dimensional. On top of that, the actions scenes are shot in the increasingly popular super-close style that makes it so you can't tell what's actually going on. I frequently couldn't determine which black car or black suit was chasing the other. Overall, profoundly disappointing. Expand
3 of 6 users found this helpful
3
BenjaminG.Nov 20, 2008
Just another Action Movie, not Bond anymore.
2 of 4 users found this helpful
2
GrantH.Nov 5, 2008
Unfortunately this film couldn't be saved by the awesomeness of Daniel Craig in the role of Bond. It just couldn't overcome the poor, messy script or the shaky 'what the hell is actually happening' camerawork. Worst of Unfortunately this film couldn't be saved by the awesomeness of Daniel Craig in the role of Bond. It just couldn't overcome the poor, messy script or the shaky 'what the hell is actually happening' camerawork. Worst of all though was the useless bad guy. He just never felt sinister enough for a Bond villain. Absolute shite unfortunately. Here's hoping that the next Bond is closer to the standard set by Casino Royale. Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful
3
EricO.Dec 6, 2008
I've literally just returned from watching this Bond movie, and while walking out of the theater, my dad commented on what he considered to be the lame plot. Listen- no one should go to a Bond movie expecting a coherent plotline; in I've literally just returned from watching this Bond movie, and while walking out of the theater, my dad commented on what he considered to be the lame plot. Listen- no one should go to a Bond movie expecting a coherent plotline; in fact, they've never had coherent plotlines. Honestly, Daniel Craig is the best Bond since Connery and I don't think anyone can seriously dispute that. The girls in QOS are perfectly acceptable and the locales are exotic, as should be expected. The major flaw with this film is the quick-cut method and hand-held camera work used by the director during action sequences. Stuntmen were injured while making this Bond film, Craig lost part of his finger during an action sequence, but damned if you can tell what's going on at any point while the action takes place. As Bond films are all about the action sequences, the quick-editing and shaky hand-held camerawork destroys a good portion of the film as a whole. Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful
4
DanSJan 10, 2009
Plot, editing, and acting aside, I'm surprised no one seems to be complaining about the rapid-fire attempted rapes near the end. I'm not a huge Bond fan, but part of the fun of these movies is the cartoonishness. Moon-based lasers? Plot, editing, and acting aside, I'm surprised no one seems to be complaining about the rapid-fire attempted rapes near the end. I'm not a huge Bond fan, but part of the fun of these movies is the cartoonishness. Moon-based lasers? Fun. Slightly disturbing brutality? Not so much. Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful
8
GeorgeMApr 6, 2009
Bond is back again...and Craig is on his second film playing everyone's favorite spy. Quantum picks up alsmot immediately after the events of the Casino Royale...so there is little time to get ready for this film, because it starts out Bond is back again...and Craig is on his second film playing everyone's favorite spy. Quantum picks up alsmot immediately after the events of the Casino Royale...so there is little time to get ready for this film, because it starts out "balls to the wall" and rarely lets up till the big explosive finale. In comparison to the first (Casino Royale), Quantum of Solace lacks a bit...whether it be the story the directorial style...nothing about this film seems as elegant or as well put together as its predecessor...it definately amps up the action a few notches however. The action scenes better choreographed and far more explosive...so it certainly excedes Casino in that regard. It's really the story and lack of substance that make this film a bit ho-hum at times...its just not interesting to follow, something about a greedy enviromentalist on the hunt for oil and he isn't afraid to lie and kill to get what he wants and then this even less important story about a girl trying to get revenge on a general for brutally killing her family (yawn)...but you really won't care about any of that, it almost seems like filler until you get to the real meat of what this movie is about...ACTION and lots of it, as its easy to see where most of the care went. Casino Royale is a far more polished Bond film...Quantum is certainly watchable and its actually quite entertaining as a hollow action film, it dosent seem to really expand on the Bond character other than we know he is even MORE upset and far more lethal in his methods now than before. it comes HIGHLY RECOMMENDED...if you are looking for action, this is it, if you are looking for story....i strongy recommend you watch Casino Royale to catch up. Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful
1
EmanTMay 4, 2009
Never before has there been such abuse of the name bond. All those years theve spent building a franchise only to have this aboination to come along. The story was week and confussing, the fighting was good but covereing a girl in oil??? Never before has there been such abuse of the name bond. All those years theve spent building a franchise only to have this aboination to come along. The story was week and confussing, the fighting was good but covereing a girl in oil??? Come up with an orginal idea rather than stealing from other bond films. Everyone envovled is a turd. End of. Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful
0
AlexHMay 7, 2009
A horrible film consisting of no plot, no story, no acting and no sense. James Bond is not a action hero, get that straight Hollywood, and next time actually try to make a new Bond film a good one and a memorable one. "Quantum of Solace" is A horrible film consisting of no plot, no story, no acting and no sense. James Bond is not a action hero, get that straight Hollywood, and next time actually try to make a new Bond film a good one and a memorable one. "Quantum of Solace" is one of the worst of 2008. Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful
3
skNov 23, 2008
Very very poor bond movie. Bad story, and honestly quite a boring movie to watch. Makes the awesome Casino Royale look like a classic.
1 of 2 users found this helpful
3
DougRFeb 7, 2009
Pitiful Bond movie. The last two are a real let down. No super spy gadgets, cars, etc. Just blow 'em away brutality. A raw film that rubbed me raw. In attempting to make super spying into some gritty, hardcore killer flick, the writers Pitiful Bond movie. The last two are a real let down. No super spy gadgets, cars, etc. Just blow 'em away brutality. A raw film that rubbed me raw. In attempting to make super spying into some gritty, hardcore killer flick, the writers have fallen prey to a neverland that would have the 00 spies bouncing off their asylum walls. Way over the top without the fantasy gadgets...too much unreal realism. What can I say to some it up? It was a real downer. Redeeming lines within the thing about forgiveness...that was good. Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful
3
MichelleSMar 28, 2009
I really did not enjoy this movie at all. I gave it a 3 because, for an action movie it had some cool action sequences. I didn't care for any of the actors in the movie either. I didn't care for the story.
1 of 2 users found this helpful
5
AnthonyFJul 16, 2009
Never have I been this critical with any Bond film. The Man with the Golden Gun was pretty bad, but this one was just off the charts. Never have I seen a Bond film suffer from an identity crisis this bad. The film is a mess. The Never have I been this critical with any Bond film. The Man with the Golden Gun was pretty bad, but this one was just off the charts. Never have I seen a Bond film suffer from an identity crisis this bad. The film is a mess. The screeplay's a mess, the action scenes are a mess and even the climax is a mess. I don't think James Bond needed to be restarted, I think he needed a good screenplay thrown his way. Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful
8
asylumspadezNov 26, 2011
Daniel Craig is good in this film once again. The action sequences are good and film in general is good as well but not as great as the previous fim. I still enjoyed it though.
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
9
LawrenceTMay 5, 2009
This movie could have had some of the best action sequences. But it lacked that and lacked the charm which you would expext from a bond. Daniel is making the franchise fall because everywoman he sleeps with dies. He should have had a bond This movie could have had some of the best action sequences. But it lacked that and lacked the charm which you would expext from a bond. Daniel is making the franchise fall because everywoman he sleeps with dies. He should have had a bond with no sequels. But this film puts the hype and has more action which I like and I loved this movie because we saw something new instead of all the James Bond movies. He is not trying to save the world and he is just out for revenge. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
9
tompDec 10, 2008
Ignore the critics, this is one of the best bond films ever.
0 of 2 users found this helpful
8
MDJul 22, 2009
My family and I were extremely disappointed in "Casino Royale" and after watching it again, I still can't figure out how it got any good reviews. "Quantum of Solace" on the other hand was much more enjoyable and DC finally starts to act My family and I were extremely disappointed in "Casino Royale" and after watching it again, I still can't figure out how it got any good reviews. "Quantum of Solace" on the other hand was much more enjoyable and DC finally starts to act more like James Bond rather than the thug he was in the previous movie. This movie is not perfect, but it was entertaining and it gives me hope that this "reinvented" Bond is evolving into someone we can like again. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
4
SMDec 30, 2008
Although Quantum of Solace was kind of a continuation to Casino Royal, the latter was at least ten times more thrilling and thought-provoking than the former, and I guess this pretty much explains why everyone is disappointed with this new Although Quantum of Solace was kind of a continuation to Casino Royal, the latter was at least ten times more thrilling and thought-provoking than the former, and I guess this pretty much explains why everyone is disappointed with this new Bond movie. However, there is still enough excitement to watch it once. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
6
TomHMar 24, 2009
Spectacular scenes and good rhythm.
0 of 1 users found this helpful
8
TonyHMay 8, 2009
I enjoy the way Daniel Craig interprets his Bond character and really appreciate that there is less focus on the "gadgetry" than in all the Bond movies. I really get a sense that this Bond cares about what and why he does what he does for a living.
0 of 1 users found this helpful
7
JayHMar 22, 2009
It has all the right ingredients for a Bond flick - rapid pace, plenty of explosions, car chases, great special effects, great international settings and over the top action. Not the best of the Bond films, but it works. Very entertaining, It has all the right ingredients for a Bond flick - rapid pace, plenty of explosions, car chases, great special effects, great international settings and over the top action. Not the best of the Bond films, but it works. Very entertaining, outstanding production values. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
8
tankjDec 11, 2008
I'm not sure why everyone wants to see the same cheesy Bond movie. Craig is the best bond yet (sorry Sean). The action in this movie is spectacular. It is not quite as good as Casino Royale but still very good.
0 of 1 users found this helpful
7
GoldenEye16Aug 22, 2010
Tooooo short and not enough lighter/comedic moments. All bond does is go around shooting people and then doesn't even kill the one guy at the end. The action was good besides the shaky camera which I personally don't like. Not really aTooooo short and not enough lighter/comedic moments. All bond does is go around shooting people and then doesn't even kill the one guy at the end. The action was good besides the shaky camera which I personally don't like. Not really a good bond movie but a decent action movie. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
7
ERG1008Aug 24, 2010
Daniel Craig's second outing as 007.
BIG set pieces, lots of carnage (Bond seems to wreck every location he goes to), fast, furious & slightly silly.
Bit of a mess this one & doesn't really hold together as the brilliant Casino Royale did.
Daniel Craig's second outing as 007.
BIG set pieces, lots of carnage (Bond seems to wreck every location he goes to), fast, furious & slightly silly.
Bit of a mess this one & doesn't really hold together as the brilliant Casino Royale did.
Craig is fine & basically an emotionless maniac which, considering his profession, is what he'd be.
Nice perfomances also by Olga Kurylenko (Blimey Charlie!!) & the great but under-used Giancarlo Giannini.
The bad guys aren't as a prominent as other films but it's still a damn sight better than any of the awful Pierce Brosnan films.
Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
7
kingshahidOct 8, 2011
This movie had a lot of action. Aside that I had no clue what the story was. I never liked this actor as James Bond either. It was not worth sitting through but the action was packed.
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
8
Compi24May 10, 2013
It may not be edited perfectly or nearly three-quarters as well-crafted as its predecessor, but "Quantum Of Solace" still stands tall as a thrillingly engrossing Bond film.
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
7
AlbertS.Nov 14, 2008
The beggining of the film, which had hardly any dialogue, felt like you were trying to get a story out of a kid with ADD. It was confusing, and it wasn't until about 1/3 of the film in that things start making sense and the movie gets The beggining of the film, which had hardly any dialogue, felt like you were trying to get a story out of a kid with ADD. It was confusing, and it wasn't until about 1/3 of the film in that things start making sense and the movie gets better. Overall the movie lacks class, that Bond factor that sets it apart from other action movies. The dialogue lacks wit, the plot lacks substance, and the movie felt like it needed about another half hour to properly explain what was going on. The villains helped the movie for me because they were evil, but not absurdly so. It would have a higher score if it wasn't for the overdone, drawn out action sequences that hilighted how underdeveloped the rest of the movie was. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
TabU.Nov 15, 2008
One of the more emotionally, intellectually stimulating espionage Bond movies to date! Technology is thrown out and the brutal human component of the spy game, the way it was meant to be was lobbed back in to great effect. Except for first One of the more emotionally, intellectually stimulating espionage Bond movies to date! Technology is thrown out and the brutal human component of the spy game, the way it was meant to be was lobbed back in to great effect. Except for first to risky action sequences that had potential but failed, overall this movie rocked. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
[Anonymous]Oct 30, 2008
Hey, seems to me I've already read one underwhelming review, but I liked this it ot. I was not wowed by the first Daniel Craig as Bond effort but seems like the new director has tuned it just right: gritty and well shot w/just the right Hey, seems to me I've already read one underwhelming review, but I liked this it ot. I was not wowed by the first Daniel Craig as Bond effort but seems like the new director has tuned it just right: gritty and well shot w/just the right touch of emotion. Enjoy. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
PhilipC.Aug 5, 2008
Bond is back and better than Ever! The action is amazing, the whole story is very continual and relative to Casino royale. But this one was much better. It's just amazing. See it for yourself. I saw a SC.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
JohnW.Nov 1, 2008
A further step away from the formulaic previous Bond entries and all the better for it. It doesn't have the charm and strong storyline that Casion Royale did but it's still a strong film. It is probably the most 'un-Bond' A further step away from the formulaic previous Bond entries and all the better for it. It doesn't have the charm and strong storyline that Casion Royale did but it's still a strong film. It is probably the most 'un-Bond' like film in the whole series save for OHMSS, as it avoids many of the signature features of the previous entries. Daniel Craig is on top form as are the surrounding cast. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
MannyNov 14, 2008
This is an exceptional movie. But beware, it is a shift away from the traditional, cheesy lined Bond movie towards a darker, richer story. Craig's acting is on par, if not better than Casino Royale. I can't comprehend how reviewers This is an exceptional movie. But beware, it is a shift away from the traditional, cheesy lined Bond movie towards a darker, richer story. Craig's acting is on par, if not better than Casino Royale. I can't comprehend how reviewers trash this movie for its austerity and lack of "campiness". It wouldn't make sense to follow the typical formula for Quantum. In addition to the psychological trauma from Vesper Lynd's death, Bond suffers numerous other cataclysms in the movie. To simply "grin" and move on, as some reviewers suggested, wouldn't be appropriate -it would actually be quite distracting. Again I have to emphasize, this movie is remarkable, if this is a sign for what's to come from this franchise, count me in. As for those reviewers who trashed the movie, I suggest they "grin" and move on. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
DavidNov 15, 2008
You people who are stuck on the old James Bond need to get over it! The old gadgets and sex and just plain sillyness is gone! Here and now in the last couple of movies we have had a real person that is believable. No out of control camera You people who are stuck on the old James Bond need to get over it! The old gadgets and sex and just plain sillyness is gone! Here and now in the last couple of movies we have had a real person that is believable. No out of control camera movement, good action that is believable (well, most of it) and still the good looking women! This was a very good movie and i love the fact that it followed the story of the last. Give it a try! Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
AndrewR.Nov 15, 2008
Ok but pales next to Casino Royale. Way too frenetic and needed plot help.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
ChadS.Nov 15, 2008
Cracked windshield. The black sports car is vulnerable. Like its driver, you see the mileage, you see the wear-and-tear. The superagent doesn't give a s*** if he lives or dies. Both man and machine aren't subjected to the same Cracked windshield. The black sports car is vulnerable. Like its driver, you see the mileage, you see the wear-and-tear. The superagent doesn't give a s*** if he lives or dies. Both man and machine aren't subjected to the same fetishisms of past James Bond movies. They're wrecks. Cracked windshield. Cracked man. "Quantum of Solace" is another killjoy, as was 2006's "Casino Royale". The Aston Martin needs a mechanic. Bond needs a shrink: somebody to cure his vertigo(the filmmaker references the 1958 Alfred Hitchcock film starring Jimmy Stewart and Kim Novak). At times, "Quantum of Solace" feels so different from the patented tropes of past Bond movies, those of the Cubby Broccoli orthodoxy may want Daniel Craig to reorientate us and say the line, that corny line of formal introduction to reassure the true believers of the superagent's 007-ness. "Quantum of Solace" will appeal to an audience who takes its cheese seriously; who believes a film like Christopher Nolan's "The Dark Knight" is the epitiome of sophistication, just because everybody is so damn glum. The irony behind this new breed of un-Cubby-like James Bond movies(it's sort of like eating broccoli) is that in trying to transcend its genre roots, "Quantum of Solace" tries on another genre for size: the science fiction genre. Craig rewrites the book on the Ian Fleming creation so completely, old-time fans may claim, "That's not him." This sober Bond does indeed seem to be a double, like something out of "Invasion of the Body Snatchers". Political subtext(or sociological subtext, or both), so prevalent in the 1956 original(and the 1978 Phillip Kaufman remake), is prevalent here, too. This accidental "Body Snatchers" remake demonstrates how Democrats, in our current political arena, act more like Moderate Republicans than Liberals. They're friendly to big business, too. Dominic Greene(Mathieu Amalric), the CEO of a supposed eco-friendly corporation, puts on a populist face at fundraisers, but when nobody's looking, he's just another cold-hearted businessman who puts people behind profit. Being both French and an environmentalist makes Greene an amalgamation of Al Gore and John Kerry. Give me a villain like Jaws(Richard Kiel from "The Spy Who Loved Me" and "Moonraker") who simply wanted to kill James, not a community of Bolivians, and above all else, our fun. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
RolandB.Nov 15, 2008
I liked it more than Casino...and that is regardless of the action being better.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
AugustNov 15, 2008
Not as bad as some of you say, and it's NOT Bourne.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
OrsonNov 16, 2008
This Bond sucks as surprisingly as Casino surpassed expectations. The problem? In a first, the action sequences have no rhyme, rythym, or reason. Truly, the first such Bond picture in which these are panful and ineffective to watch. This Bond sucks as surprisingly as Casino surpassed expectations. The problem? In a first, the action sequences have no rhyme, rythym, or reason. Truly, the first such Bond picture in which these are panful and ineffective to watch. Frustrating viewing. he non-action scenes are actually economical gems, but far too brief to enjoy as Bondian. I wish the film would be re-cut before going to DVD. Then I would have something to look forward too (the double DVD release). Instead, I wonder if they even shot enough real action footage to do it. An amazing waste saved only by superior principle actors. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
JamesK.Nov 16, 2008
Bond has come to be understood as bullets, bombs and babes... this is where Quantum of Solace goes awry. Yes, it has all that and more, but the movie feels that the plots only purpose is to be the loose threads (read gossamer) that tie all Bond has come to be understood as bullets, bombs and babes... this is where Quantum of Solace goes awry. Yes, it has all that and more, but the movie feels that the plots only purpose is to be the loose threads (read gossamer) that tie all 130min of bullets bombs and babes together. Is it really so dangerous to let actors act that the safer solution is to blow them up? I would hope not. It is a shame that when Casino Royale so perfectly crafts a bond worthy of Connery himself they let it slip right back into the world of unimaginative garbage worthy of Langsby. I only hope that they decide to work a little story and character into the next film. perhaps instead of 90% action 5%sex 5% story, they could strike a more balanced blend. Better luck next time guys Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
MartyL.Nov 16, 2008
Daniel Craig *IS* Jamed Bond. Loved the story, loved the action. Hated the cinematography and editing. TO DIRECTORS - YOU HAVE AMAZING SET DESIGN PEOPLE, YOU DON'T NEED TO SHAKE THE DAMN CAMERA TO HIDE STUFF... Please... Give us camera Daniel Craig *IS* Jamed Bond. Loved the story, loved the action. Hated the cinematography and editing. TO DIRECTORS - YOU HAVE AMAZING SET DESIGN PEOPLE, YOU DON'T NEED TO SHAKE THE DAMN CAMERA TO HIDE STUFF... Please... Give us camera shots that lets us SEE the action instead of blurr it!!! Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
WilliamM.Nov 16, 2008
I have to say, as some one who owns and has watched all the movies and the same goes for all the books. I really liked quantum of solace. I'll agree that it wasn't quite as good as Casino Royale. It was a very lean movie, giving I have to say, as some one who owns and has watched all the movies and the same goes for all the books. I really liked quantum of solace. I'll agree that it wasn't quite as good as Casino Royale. It was a very lean movie, giving you only the bare minimum to know what was still going on. And in keeping the Bondisms to a minimum I think was a good idea for the series. I don't hope it stays completely lean like this. But I also want new people like Forster to bring new perspective to an old hero. And for being so different I think it will stand out as either a favorite or as a hated movie. I don't want to always know what James Bond will say or do, and after experiencing as much Bond as possible you start to want to see a new take. It will never be as tongue in cheek as Roger moore's movies were. Or as Smooth as Connery. But it's a new type of Bond just like every new actor to play him has put him in a new light. I just don't want to put limits on my favorite series of all time, I don't want the writers to have to include bond... James Bond, or that he has to order his martini and have three girls per movie. I love the old Bonds, and I will always watch them often, but I want the news ones to be fresh as well. I'll make my last sentence an example from Ian Fleming himself. He wrote many books with Bond, with quite a few staples, but they were never mandatory, which made their occurrences more special. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
7
JonB.Nov 16, 2008
All the action missing from Casino Royale with about a quarter of the plot.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
JimG.Nov 17, 2008
Poor plot, character development, and script kept this movie from being what it should be.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
7
PeterONov 17, 2008
Good but not enough fun, bring back the gadgets.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
JacobV.Nov 17, 2008
I love the new bond who doesn't have outrageous gadgets and could actually be a real guy. This movie is great because you see how one dead end turns into a lead that becomes a whole operation. This movie doesn't sugarcoat anything. I love the new bond who doesn't have outrageous gadgets and could actually be a real guy. This movie is great because you see how one dead end turns into a lead that becomes a whole operation. This movie doesn't sugarcoat anything. Bond is ruthless and remorseless. He kills everything. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
ScottL.Nov 20, 2008
It was not dificult to tell that the was Forster's first time directing an action scene. The scenes were more than a little conrtived and the cuts made you spend more time wondering who was doing what. The acting was merely average. I It was not dificult to tell that the was Forster's first time directing an action scene. The scenes were more than a little conrtived and the cuts made you spend more time wondering who was doing what. The acting was merely average. I never got the feeling that Camille was really all that angry, and Bond seemed more like someone had killed his dog, not his lover. The villain was weak and his scheme was boring. All in all, this is one of those movies where I wish I had my time back more than my money. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
DavidW.Nov 22, 2008
One terrible scene after another. Action set pieces are incoherent. The drama is dialed down. Craig's muscles are the most impressive thing on display. For the Bond movie with the biggest budget, this was a waste of a lot of money.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
DorothyL.Nov 23, 2008
As a woman, I was looking forward to seeing Bond in another speedo, admiring his gorgeous physique and relishing in the delight of some outrageous plot to rule the world. Sadly, I was disappointed. The plot was weak, the bad guy looked As a woman, I was looking forward to seeing Bond in another speedo, admiring his gorgeous physique and relishing in the delight of some outrageous plot to rule the world. Sadly, I was disappointed. The plot was weak, the bad guy looked creepy and there was no seduction. It was all action and not much else. I still think Daniel Craig is the second best Bond, after Sean Connery and hope that the next installment will be a true Bond movie, not an action movie about someone getting revenge for a lost love. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
JIMBNov 24, 2008
this movie is by far better than the all the horror mivies being made today. at least bond uses more realistic toys in the new movies and not all the old gimimicks, car that dissapear, watches that can left 2 people without taking your arm this movie is by far better than the all the horror mivies being made today. at least bond uses more realistic toys in the new movies and not all the old gimimicks, car that dissapear, watches that can left 2 people without taking your arm off? Hope the new writers keep it real in the future as well. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
JohnnyG.Nov 24, 2008
What's wrong with a little action? Not as good as Casino Royale of course, but still good nonetheless. I had low expectations due to hearing poor reviews from people who had high expectations, so when I went into the film I left feeling What's wrong with a little action? Not as good as Casino Royale of course, but still good nonetheless. I had low expectations due to hearing poor reviews from people who had high expectations, so when I went into the film I left feeling very relieved and anything but dissappointed. True, I have not scene any bond film other than a Brosnan's or Craig's, but I have to admit, for what this film was, it was a good one. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
DH.Nov 20, 2008
Daniel Craig's physical presence and intensity is definitely a plus for the current Bond series. The action was fast but the plot was a bit vague, giving the impression it was all over too quickly without really knowing what happened. Daniel Craig's physical presence and intensity is definitely a plus for the current Bond series. The action was fast but the plot was a bit vague, giving the impression it was all over too quickly without really knowing what happened. the main drawback I noticed was the subtle anti-American undertones; the American intelligence agent with the moustache that was portayed as a bumbling oaf, and the sublte comments about "the Americans just in it for the oil". Also; no "Q". I realize they're trying to get away from the sci-fi gadgetry that went overboard during the Brosnan era, but I don't think they should eliminate gadgetry all together. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
7
teriwanTNov 27, 2008
Worst Bond movie ever? I think not! In fact, I think that was Die Another Day. Ring any bells? Thank you Daniel Craig for reinstating my faith in the franchise. Sure, this film is not perfect, but its a definate step in the right direction. Worst Bond movie ever? I think not! In fact, I think that was Die Another Day. Ring any bells? Thank you Daniel Craig for reinstating my faith in the franchise. Sure, this film is not perfect, but its a definate step in the right direction. My only two complaints about this one are that the villian could have been more menacing and the action scenes not so poorly edited. Otherwise it was a very enjoyable night at the movies for me. I like the fact that they are moulding the character closer to Ian Flemmings original ideas of Bond and not the horrible cheese-and-wine character that Brosnan portrayed with his stupid remarks and lame jokes. Can't wait to see what they will do with the next installment! Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
LarryNov 28, 2008
On balance, no better or worse than "Casino Royale." Had its strengths, plus real weaknesses. Craig is a special Bond, as was Connery. The development of his relationship with 'M' has been excellent, probably the best element of On balance, no better or worse than "Casino Royale." Had its strengths, plus real weaknesses. Craig is a special Bond, as was Connery. The development of his relationship with 'M' has been excellent, probably the best element of two movies. Plot was thin, but not nearly as confusing as I'd been led to believe. Really disliked the denouement scenes in the weird desert hotel. Lacked cleverness and the action was forced on the viewer rather mindlessly. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
ASNov 29, 2008
After watching this movie, I've come to realize that many people (and especially critics) just didn't get it. It's part two of Casino Royale. It is a two-movie storyline that explains why he is who he is and why the love of a After watching this movie, I've come to realize that many people (and especially critics) just didn't get it. It's part two of Casino Royale. It is a two-movie storyline that explains why he is who he is and why the love of a woman will never again pull him away from his "job". It wasn't that the plot was weak as many as said. It was simply just an extension of the first movie's plot to wrap up James Bond's introduction to us in this format. There were obvious signs that the next movie will be a new plot in a more traditional Bond way. The first two movies set up who this Bond is...now we go forward. By the way, the entertainment value of this movie is still very high. It is such a good way to introduce the best bond of a new generation. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
BaraS.Nov 5, 2008
Nothing special I must say. After great Casino Royale I expected something even better but no. Nothing like that happened. Evil guy is not so evil. Olga Kurylenko is very nice girl but she´s not charismatic Eva Green. Actions Nothing special I must say. After great Casino Royale I expected something even better but no. Nothing like that happened. Evil guy is not so evil. Olga Kurylenko is very nice girl but she´s not charismatic Eva Green. Actions are easy to forget. My expectations weren´t fulfilled. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
GabrielJ.Dec 11, 2008
well I
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
JohnDDec 1, 2008
After readiing the reviews I was expecting to be disappointed, but this Bond movie is one of the most exotic, intelligent and action-packed of all. Some really great sequences - all properly done - (no CGI) - and the close-up / quick cut After readiing the reviews I was expecting to be disappointed, but this Bond movie is one of the most exotic, intelligent and action-packed of all. Some really great sequences - all properly done - (no CGI) - and the close-up / quick cut MTV-style editing places the viewer right in the mayhem. Yes, it's brutal and there are absolutely no Moore-esque one-liners or gadgets, this is a Bond for adults. Recommended. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
TomCDec 2, 2008
What Craig gains in the way of brutish subtlety means a loss of the charm and fun people expect from Bond films. Quantum is perfectly average, reaching the quota for explosions and attractive women, however; the plot is convoluted while What Craig gains in the way of brutish subtlety means a loss of the charm and fun people expect from Bond films. Quantum is perfectly average, reaching the quota for explosions and attractive women, however; the plot is convoluted while falling short of being intriguing, the action scene directing is frustratingly scrappy and most disturbingly it seems that the formally flirtatious attitude of Bond films has been abandoned. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
DominicG.Dec 20, 2008
Really enjoyed this movie - so much better than expected after reading mised reviews. The Bond team have truly reinvigorated this frachise just when it was on its last legs. A gripping, suspenseful plot that keeps the audience guessing, Really enjoyed this movie - so much better than expected after reading mised reviews. The Bond team have truly reinvigorated this frachise just when it was on its last legs. A gripping, suspenseful plot that keeps the audience guessing, worthy characters and break neck action sequences. I hope they can maintain this quality standard for the next one. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
PeterHDec 2, 2008
Terrible movie. While Craig has an aura of intensity about him which makes him a wonderful bond, the plot was absolutely terrible. At the beginning I thought that there would be more of a focus on the secretive 'company', but they Terrible movie. While Craig has an aura of intensity about him which makes him a wonderful bond, the plot was absolutely terrible. At the beginning I thought that there would be more of a focus on the secretive 'company', but they barely went into that. While I do not like films that are pointlessly dragged out to the extent of wasted time, this was at the opposite extreme; being too short to fulfill the plot or send any message to the audience. It was like trying to fit a 400 pound guy into small size clothing - it does not work. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
JackS.Dec 4, 2008
I'm not joking around, what the hell was the point to that movie? It has to be the worst 007 movie ever. The only movie that isn't written by Ian Flemming (he only mad the charecters not the story) turns out to be the worst. I know I'm not joking around, what the hell was the point to that movie? It has to be the worst 007 movie ever. The only movie that isn't written by Ian Flemming (he only mad the charecters not the story) turns out to be the worst. I know they could have made something so much better then that. What was the point to all that action? What is the bad thing thats going on right now? Why is there cars chasing eachother? Is that charecter good or bad? What is Greene trying to do with the world? So many questions are unclear once the movie is over. Everyone who saw it that I know said that they were lost the whole movie. It totally needed more talking and explaining for people to understand what is going on that whole movie. It can't pick off the first movie right when it starts. It is confusing and you have no clue what was going on most of the time until the end. And even still you are still lost in questions what was going on that movie. It was confusing, the action was pointless, it was nothing like the tranditional Bond movies. Ian Flemming is the writer of 007... there is no one else like him. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
MarkWDec 9, 2008
The first Bond film I liked was Casino Royale the second is Quantum of Solace. I just can't stand the cheese associated with most Bond films so the last two instalments are a welcome relief. Still I guess I can understand why Bond fans The first Bond film I liked was Casino Royale the second is Quantum of Solace. I just can't stand the cheese associated with most Bond films so the last two instalments are a welcome relief. Still I guess I can understand why Bond fans are bitter, there are plenty of intelligent films out there so perhaps the Bond franchise should stick to what the Bond fans like. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
BenW.Oct 31, 2008
Good film. Much faster paced than Casino Royale. Less story more action and that's done incredibly well.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
HarryLeechOct 31, 2008
This is not a James Bond film, i would have given it a 7 or 8 if it wasn't, but james bond does not drive a ford.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
DazzerNOct 31, 2008
The film is nothing short of an adreline rush to head from start to end. Have to give credit to marc foster the director for pulling off a movie like this. I honestly thought daniel craig was a shambles in the beginning of casino royale, but The film is nothing short of an adreline rush to head from start to end. Have to give credit to marc foster the director for pulling off a movie like this. I honestly thought daniel craig was a shambles in the beginning of casino royale, but he has proved more than worthy of holding the title 007. One the best bond films i have watched! (P.S I also have to admit I hated the intro song, its just not bond style, otherwise would have gave 10!). Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
MeJan 16, 2009
Where was the debonair 007? New 007 has no class, no catchy lines that got laughs, and completely lacks any sophistication as other Bond actors. Furthermore, the movie lacked the most entertaining elements: Where were Q and Moneypennie? Where was the debonair 007? New 007 has no class, no catchy lines that got laughs, and completely lacks any sophistication as other Bond actors. Furthermore, the movie lacked the most entertaining elements: Where were Q and Moneypennie? Where were the cool gadgets we've come to expect to see in all Bond movies? Again I ask where were the "Phrases that Pay"? Furthermore this movie was poorly edited. All action scenes were limited to an ungodly half second. They must have not done any retaked for the flubbed scenes and pieced together all the stuff they liked in the end to make it so choppy and hard to watch/follow with your eyes. Gave me a real headache. A true waste of film and the money DH and I spent to see this poorly filmed, acted and letdown of a 007 film. Truly a big letdown compared to Brosnan, Connery, Moore and Lazenby. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
wetwebworkNov 14, 2008
Slept through most of this. Am I in a position to rate it? Perhaps not, but you shouldn't fall asleep in a Bond film. If any film should keep you awake, it should be a Bond.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
7
tdmacNov 14, 2008
I think Craig's take on Bond is fabulous. He's the best Bond thus far, in my opinion. That being said, I think this movie is a bit all over the place given the multiple story lines that run throughout. Some of them are entirely I think Craig's take on Bond is fabulous. He's the best Bond thus far, in my opinion. That being said, I think this movie is a bit all over the place given the multiple story lines that run throughout. Some of them are entirely unnecessary as they do not relate in any way to the characters and occurrences of Casino Royale. Because this movie "intends" to be a sequel to C.R., the added stories only succeed in muddying the water. I wanted to see Bond's emotional journey on being betrayed by Vesper and losing her...and to know more about the organization who set all of that into motion. Instead we get too many stories that end up keeping each story diluted. Great for action and "homages" paid to the series. Daniel Craig and Judi Dench, great. I wanted to see more Jeffrey Wright! Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
ChristianP.Nov 14, 2008
I was worried when I saw the bad reviews, but after seeing the movie myself, I am so relieved. It got off to a bad start with the close-up heavy car chase that was disorienting and then the theme song was terribly produced and I saw that I was worried when I saw the bad reviews, but after seeing the movie myself, I am so relieved. It got off to a bad start with the close-up heavy car chase that was disorienting and then the theme song was terribly produced and I saw that Paul Haggis wrote it and cringed. BUT all of my fears were put to rest. Daniel Craig is wonderful as Bond and Judy Dench steals her scenes. The villain is a great 21st century bad guy--weasely and corrupt but still pure evil. I'm a bit confused with all these bad reviews on here! Honestly, what were the big problems?! Just as gritty as Casino Royale. I would love to see the next one be more of a spy/espionage film than an action movie though. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
RyanL.Nov 14, 2008
Serious, focused Bond film, nicely bookending the previous chapter, Casino Royale. It's different from past Bonds, but variety has been what's kept this series going for 45 years.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
kylebNov 14, 2008
Just got back from a midnight showing. Don't believe the critics. This is a pi$$ed off and obsessed Bond which Craig plays perfectly. For the straight men who are the target audience, it's a rockin' good time, but that leaves Just got back from a midnight showing. Don't believe the critics. This is a pi$$ed off and obsessed Bond which Craig plays perfectly. For the straight men who are the target audience, it's a rockin' good time, but that leaves out a lot of critics. Only problem I found with it was the villain is pretty weak. One more thing: Best Dialog Ever--at least in a Bond flick. Tightly written and diamond sharp. The audience was straining to not miss a word, and there were many satisfied laughs at the clever lines. The lack of a 40 minute card game is also a bonus. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
7
MattA.Nov 14, 2008
Ok... so maybe i'm being a little too nice to QoS. I mean...plot wise... it was messy. It used every excuse to get to the next action scene. The "bad guy" was too low-key and not maniacal in the least. The bond girl was nice... but too Ok... so maybe i'm being a little too nice to QoS. I mean...plot wise... it was messy. It used every excuse to get to the next action scene. The "bad guy" was too low-key and not maniacal in the least. The bond girl was nice... but too self- sufficient. So all in all... it wasn't James Bond. Bond himself didn't even seem to be having a good time at all. However... THIS WAS NOT TERRIBLE! The action was fun...well...for the audience i suppose. The scenes were beautiful. Casino Royal gave us too much and left us wanting more. Quantum gives us some hamburger to fill the rest of us up...when we were eating steak. Go into Quantum, as i did, expecting to see a decent action movie. Don't go in hoping to be on the edge of your seat with the plot however. Just smile at the pretty things going boom. Collapse
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
chrishNov 14, 2008
I agree with the Village Voice review - an incomprehensible mess. I don't agree with comparing this film to the Bourne series, because the Bourne series at least had a semblance of a narrative. From the "Where am I? What am I doing?" I agree with the Village Voice review - an incomprehensible mess. I don't agree with comparing this film to the Bourne series, because the Bourne series at least had a semblance of a narrative. From the "Where am I? What am I doing?" opening car chase, to the horribly ill-advised homage to Goldfinger's most iconic scene, this film absolutely reeks. The only reason I give it even a 1 out of 10 - taken as an art film about blind rage, it works on some level. We're lost, disoriented, and, even though Bond and what's-her-name get their revenge in the end, unsatisfied. But "Diamonds are Forever" and "The Spy who loved me" dealt with similar revenge motivation, and they didn't end up looking like a video game tech demo. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
JesseB.Nov 14, 2008
Deep, engaging, shot and edited with far more heart and mind then any previous Bond film, Quantum of Solace proves that quality filmmaking to a franchise DOES improve the end result.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
KidNov 15, 2008
Daniel Craig can be Bond, but the directors won't ALLOW him to reach the pedestal. The last great Bond film was 'Goldeneye'......Bond doesn't need the whole 'Fast-paced-too-quick-for-your-eyes' action sequences Daniel Craig can be Bond, but the directors won't ALLOW him to reach the pedestal. The last great Bond film was 'Goldeneye'......Bond doesn't need the whole 'Fast-paced-too-quick-for-your-eyes' action sequences - it needs a plan, even if the plan is slowly revealed in both revelation and action - Bond isn't meant to be the way they have lately portrayed him. He's a smooth-player, charming, and a planner - and as Roger Ebert said perfectly, not an 'action-hero'. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
BrianB.Nov 15, 2008
Daniel Craig continues to push his role in this economical version of bond who acts first and rarely has time to quip. The suave spy in the tailored suit has never been so kinetic and so engagingly brutal.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
JeffLNov 15, 2008
Forget listening to these reviews. If you liked Casino Royale, this is worth seeing to make your own judgment. To me, it was quite good.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
saNov 15, 2008
Some PG13 movies are so brilliantly written that they overcome the rating burden, like Dark Knight and Casino Royale. However, a lot of PG13 movies, like Quantum of Solace, feel neutered. The story seemed to drag on forever, we've seen Some PG13 movies are so brilliantly written that they overcome the rating burden, like Dark Knight and Casino Royale. However, a lot of PG13 movies, like Quantum of Solace, feel neutered. The story seemed to drag on forever, we've seen the action scenes before, and the characters felt like throwaways. Bond was just emotionally dead in this movie, like the only thing driving him to live was revenge. No scene was more evident of this then when he throws his friend's corpse in a trash can, and says coldly, "He doesn't care." It reminded me of the suicidal mess that Will Smith played in I Am Legend. Neither character gave us much reason to root for them. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
ChrisGNov 15, 2008
Great movie, for all of you who complain that hes not "suave", and "charming", go read the original book , yes i mean the guy who invented bond, he was neither of those things. he was a cold hearted prick who left a body count everywhere he Great movie, for all of you who complain that hes not "suave", and "charming", go read the original book , yes i mean the guy who invented bond, he was neither of those things. he was a cold hearted prick who left a body count everywhere he went, they are going back to the more realistic TRUE James bond. please do some research before you say what things are supposed to be. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
KelvinNov 15, 2008
As a stand alone action film it was okay......... as a Bond film it wasn't very satisfying. Bond has kept people flocking to the cinemas for over 40 years precisely because he is Bond. This film however tries hard to strip Bond of all As a stand alone action film it was okay......... as a Bond film it wasn't very satisfying. Bond has kept people flocking to the cinemas for over 40 years precisely because he is Bond. This film however tries hard to strip Bond of all his Bondness. Take the icon Bond Shilouette that shows Bond shooting a gun as viewed from the gun barrel, its always shown at the beginning of the film.......not this time! In Quantum, though we didn't wait to read all the end credits, I've read that they place that on that scene on the end credits! And what about the famous John Barry, James Bond theme, they never play it! (aside fom a few faint piano notes at the beginning) The director Marc Forster was allegedley a James Bond film fan.....well you could have fooled me! Too many traditional Bond trademarks were missing, essentially making Bond little more than a more world weary version of Jason Bourne, surely no coincidence that the guy who was involved in the action sequences also worked on the Bourne films. Bond doesn't have to try and comete with Bourne, they are 2 very different animals but this latest incarnation of Bond blurs that boundary. Let's hope that next time out they bring back Bond in all his glory and yes that includes the iconic opening Bond Shilouette and the Bond theme music. As they say "don't fix what ain't broke"! Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
MarkB.Nov 15, 2008
Nearly as good as Casino Royale, and better than any bond movie since Connery. The critics got scared to like this one for some reason. Believe me it is worth your time.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
wolfiefishNov 15, 2008
License to Kill is now officially (in my opnion) not the worst Bond movie ever made. Quantum of Solace takes that top spot. Bond had never been so banal. If I wanted to watch ultra violence I would have rented a film about footy hooligans. License to Kill is now officially (in my opnion) not the worst Bond movie ever made. Quantum of Solace takes that top spot. Bond had never been so banal. If I wanted to watch ultra violence I would have rented a film about footy hooligans. The action sequences are undecipherable, the dialogue is dull and I've seen better chase scenes from the keystone cops. Boring, boring and even more yawn inducing tat. This film sucks, and should invoke the end of Daniel Craig as Bond. By the way I am a massive Bond fan, and I thought Casino Royale was great, but if this is the way things are going with Bond, then it's time to have a massive re-think. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
JoeReviewerNov 15, 2008
This movie dragged for so long (30-40 mins.) I thought I was going to slip into a coma and never wake up. I was waiting for the usher to hand out mini pillows. The main villian also came off fairly weak and with no real bond nemesis This movie dragged for so long (30-40 mins.) I thought I was going to slip into a coma and never wake up. I was waiting for the usher to hand out mini pillows. The main villian also came off fairly weak and with no real bond nemesis intelligence or BIG evil plan. The movies ending was horrible. In the end you feel dirty like you need a shower and ripped off the only good thing about it is that it ended. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
RichardT.Nov 15, 2008
Action but no sex for England.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
AndyM.Nov 16, 2008
I'm no rabid Bond fan, so this review won't be based on Quantum's adherence to the books or how it compares Sean Connery's films. In a nutshell, this movie had no great plot. It tried to be intellectual, but the plot was I'm no rabid Bond fan, so this review won't be based on Quantum's adherence to the books or how it compares Sean Connery's films. In a nutshell, this movie had no great plot. It tried to be intellectual, but the plot was just a mess. So one would think action would make up for all of this, right? Well, there is a LOT of action, but I hate how it was shot. The car chase at the beginning has a camera so frantic and jumpy that it's nearly impossible to decipher what's going on. It gets a little better after this, but not much. The "Bond girl" in this movie got a lot of hype, but she wasn't THAT good looking. The complete and utter lack of sex didn't ruin the movie, but it certainly could've helped things. Oh, and there are no gadgets, save for... touchscreen technology, which is so 2 years ago. So why a 5? It's got some stunning scenes (when you can see what's going on) and Daniel Craig plays a cool Bond, so that helps. This is... a rentable, I think. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
7
WilliamB.Nov 16, 2008
Daniel Craig is fine, but this film is too uptight! Sometimes the action set-pieces are confusing and incoherent.
0 of 0 users found this helpful